Thread Links			Date Links
Thread Prev	Thread Next	Thread Index	Date Prev	Date Next	Date Index

Re: [P1619-2] Do we need Clause 6.2 "Key Export format"

To: P1619-2@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [P1619-2] Do we need Clause 6.2 "Key Export format"
From: "Robert A. (Bob) Lockhart" <rlockhart@xxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 7 Oct 2008 16:17:04 -0700
Delivered-to: mhonarc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <ed843b100810071427i53045b24m5bd69d4672df055b@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
List-help: <http://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?LIST=P1619-2>, <mailto:LISTSERV@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG?body=INFO%20P1619-2>
List-owner: <mailto:P1619-2-request@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG>
List-subscribe: <mailto:P1619-2-subscribe-request@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG>
List-unsubscribe: <mailto:P1619-2-unsubscribe-request@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG>
References: <ed843b100810071427i53045b24m5bd69d4672df055b@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Reply-to: "Robert A. (Bob) Lockhart" <rlockhart@xxxxxxxx>
User-agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.17 (Windows/20080914)

If P1619.3 is defining a file format (see architecture depicted inFigure 1 in P1619.3 Draft 5 Section 4.2 at top of page 9) then there isno reason to do so.


Bob L.

Matt Ball wrote:

Hi Folks,
Does anyone currently intended to support the XML-based key exportformat for P1619.2 as specified in Section 6.2 of P1619.2 Draft 6? Ifnot, we may consider removing it and relying instead on P1619.3 tospecify such formats.
--
Thanks!
-Matt

Matt Ball, IEEE P1619.x SISWG Chair
Cell: 303-717-2717
http://www.linkedin.com/in/matthewvball
http://www.mavaball.net/

References:
- [P1619-2] Do we need Clause 6.2 "Key Export format"
  - From: Matt Ball

Prev by Date: [P1619-2] Draft Minutes posted for 2008-10-07
Next by Date: [P1619-2] Fwd: [STDS-P1619] 1619.2 keywords
Previous by thread: [P1619-2] Do we need Clause 6.2 "Key Export format"
Next by thread: [P1619-2] Fwd: [STDS-P1619] 1619.2 keywords
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread